W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > July 2012

PROV-ISSUE-459 (prov-constraints-lc-review): PROV-CONSTRAINTS review [prov-dm-constraints]

From: Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:02:36 +0000
Message-Id: <E1SsAyi-00012E-65@tibor.w3.org>
To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
PROV-ISSUE-459 (prov-constraints-lc-review): PROV-CONSTRAINTS review [prov-dm-constraints]


Raised by: James Cheney
On product: prov-dm-constraints


This issue is to capture review comments for the next draft of PROV-CONSTRAINTS, which will be released soon.

Please answer the following review questions:

1.  Is PROV-CONSTRAINTS ready to be released as a last call working draft (modulo editorial issues and resolution to the below issues)?

2.  Regarding ISSUE-346: Is the role, meaning, and intended use of each type of inference or constraint clear?  (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/346)

3.  Regarding ISSUE-451: Are there any objections to the revision-is-alternate inference? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/451)

4.  Regarding ISSUE-454: Are the rules for disjointness clear and appropriate? (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/454)

5.  Regarding ISSUE-458: Should influence (and therefore all subrelations, including communication) be irreflexive, or can it be reflexive (i.e., can wasInfluencedBy(x,x) be valid)?  (http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/458)

5.  Are there any objections to closing other open issues on PROV-CONSTRAINTS?  They are:


6.  Are there any new issues concerning definitions, constraints, or inferences? If so, please raise as new issues to be addressed before LC vote, ideally with a suggested change that would address the issue.

Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 11:02:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:18 UTC